On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 04:01:13PM +0000, David Laight wrote: > From: Thomas Bogendoerfer > > Sent: 13 April 2021 16:19 > > > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 12:37:25PM +0000, David Laight wrote: > > > From: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbog...@alpha.franken.de> > > > > Sent: 13 April 2021 12:15 > > > ... > > > > > The __access_ok() is noted with `Ensure that the range [addr, > > > > > addr+size) > > > > > is within the process's address space`. Does the range checked by > > > > > __access_ok() on MIPS is [addr, addr+size]. So if we want to use > > > > > access_ok(s, 1), should we modify __access_ok()? Or my > > > > > misunderstanding? > > > > > > > > you are right, I'm going to apply > > > > > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mips/patch/20190209194718.1294-1-paul.bur...@mips.com/ > > > > > > > > to fix that. > > > > > > Isn't that still wrong? > > > If an application does: > > > write(fd, (void *)0xffff0000, 0); > > > it should return 0, not -1 and EFAULT/SIGSEGV. > > > > WRITE(2) Linux Programmer's Manual > > WRITE(2) > > [...] > > If count is zero and fd refers to a regular file, then write() > > may > > return a failure status if one of the errors below is detected. If > > no > > errors are detected, or error detection is not performed, 0 will > > be > > returned without causing any other effect. If count is zero and > > fd > > refers to a file other than a regular file, the results are not > > speci- > > fied. > > [...] > > EFAULT buf is outside your accessible address space. > > > > at least it's covered by the man page on my Linux system. > > Something related definitely caused grief in the setsockopt() changes. > > > > There is also the question about why this makes any difference > > > to the original problem of logging in via the graphical interface. > > > > kernel/module.c: mod->args = strndup_user(uargs, ~0UL >> 1); > > > > and strndup_user does a strnlen_user. > > That call is just gross. > Why did it work before the removal of set_fs() etc.
strnlen_user just did the equivalent of access_ok(s, 0) and I copy&pasted the wrong access_ok() statement :-( > Or was there another change that affected strndup_user() ? no, just the change in strnlen_user. Thomas. -- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
